Rita Suman, Noida vs Assessee

Rita Suman Vs. Assessing Officer, D-1/153D, Aravali Apartment Ward -24(3), Sector-52, Noida New Delhi (PAN:BBFPS2394G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by : Sh. K.P. Garg, CA Respondent by: Sh. Vikram Sahay, Sr.DR Date of hearing: 07.04.2015 Date of pronouncement: 17.04.2015

ORDER

PER INTURI RAMA RAO, A.M.:

This is an appeal by the assessee filed against the order of learned CIT(A),

dated 19.10.2012, passed for the assessment year 2006-07 on the following

grounds:

i. The ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the legal ground in sub-silentio without dealing with it, that the order of the ld. AO is bad in law and on facts, having been passed with a biased mind, in a hurry without giving proper opportunity to be heard and against the principles of natural justice.

ii. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the order of AO which is contrary to law and without jurisdiction on account of non- service of statutory notice u/s 143(2) in time, accepting the report of the AO as gospel truth without any evidence of actual receipt of notice by the assessee.

iii. Without prejudice to GOA-1 & 2, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the impugned addition of Rs. 14,53,500/- made by the learned AO on account of alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 being 2

unexplained deposits in cash in the bank, rejecting the explanation of the assessee or irrelevant considerations without evidence.

2. The brief facts of the case are as under:

2.1 The assessee is an individual. She filed the return of income for the

assessment year 2006-07 on 22 nd June, 2006 declaring income of Rs. 1,30,430/-.

Subsequently, the case was taken for scrutiny and the assessee never responded

to the notice issued under Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short

"the Act"). The Assessing Officer found cash deposit in the assessee's bank

account with the Citizen Co-operative Bank Ltd for a sum of Rs. 14,53,500/-

which was brought to tax, in the absence of any explanation for the source of

cash deposit in the bank, and completed the assessment under Section 144 of the

Act. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the learned CIT(A), New

Delhi, who vide order dated 19.10.2012 dismissed the appeal.

2.2 It was contended by learned Authorized Representative before the learned

CIT(A) that the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was not served upon the

assessee within 12 months from the date of filing of the return of income. The

said contention was rejected by the learned CIT(A) by holding that the notice

under Section 142(1) of the Act was sent through registered post and not

returned back by postal authorities and therefore, deemed to have been served

within the prescribed time. It was further contended that all the deposits in the

bank account were made out of receipts from business and therefore, no addition

was called for. This contention was also not accepted by the learned CIT(A) 3

since no details of profit and loss account and balance sheet were filed before

him. Aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.

3. On the other hand, learned DR relied upon the order of learned CIT(A).

4. The arguments advanced before the learned CIT(A) were reiterated before

us and no evidence was filed before us in support of carrying on business i.e.

profit & loss and balance sheet. The assessee also not furnished any explanation

as to why he could not comply with notices under Section 143(2) of the Act

before the Assessing Officer. Neither, the case of the assessee, that he was

prevented by sufficient and reasoned cause to comply with notice u/s 143 (2) of

the Act. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the learned CIT(A) has

passed a reasoned order which does not call for any interference. Hence, the

order of learned CIT(A) is upheld.

6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

The decision is pronounced in the open court on 17th April, 2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (G.C. GUPTA) (INTURI RAMA RAO) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 17th April, 2015. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi